AN EXAMINATION OF THE PREDICTIVE VALIDITY OF THE STRUCTURED ASSESSMENT OF RISK AND NEED-TREATMENT NEEDS ANALYSIS (SARN-TNA) IN ENGLAND AND WALES

被引:5
作者
Tully, Ruth J. [1 ,2 ]
Browne, Kevin D. [3 ]
Craig, Leam A. [4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Nottingham, Nottingham NG8 1BB, England
[2] Tully Forens Psychol Ltd, Nottingham, England
[3] Univ Nottingham, Forens Psychol & Child Hlth, Nottingham NG8 1BB, England
[4] Forens Psychol Practice Ltd, Sutton Coldfield, W Midlands, England
[5] Univ Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, W Midlands, England
关键词
sex offense; predictive validity; risk assessment; structured professional judgment; reoffense; reconviction; SEXUAL OFFENDERS; INTERRATER RELIABILITY; VIOLENT RECIDIVISM; CHILD MOLESTERS; METAANALYSIS; RECONVICTION; APPROXIMATE; INSTRUMENTS; ACCURACY; SCALES;
D O I
10.1177/0093854814553096
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
The Structured Assessment of Risk and Need-Treatment Needs Analysis (SARN-TNA) is routinely used by the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) in England and Wales to aid assessment of risk of sexual offenders. This structured professional judgment tool's predictive validity was examined with convicted sexual offenders in this field study. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) was not significant at 2 years (Area Under the Curve [AUC] = 0.59, n = 304, p = .193) or at 4 years (AUC = 0.57, n = 161, p = .242). Survival analysis did not reveal significantly different sexual reconviction rates between SARN-TNA risk groups. Individual domains were also examined, with the sexual interests domain being the only predictive element of the SARN-TNA risk assessment tool. Results support further examination of how SARN-TNA risk group is calculated and more heavily weighting the importance of the sexual interests domain. The SARN-TNA should not be relied upon as a predictor scale of sexual reoffending.
引用
收藏
页码:509 / 528
页数:20
相关论文
共 46 条
[1]   Approximate is better than "exact" for interval estimation of binomial proportions [J].
Agresti, A ;
Coull, BA .
AMERICAN STATISTICIAN, 1998, 52 (02) :119-126
[2]   The recent past and near future of risk and/or need assessment [J].
Andrews, DA ;
Bonta, J ;
Wormith, JS .
CRIME & DELINQUENCY, 2006, 52 (01) :7-27
[3]  
Bagley C., 2000, Child Abuse Review, V9, P264
[4]   An Examination of the Predictive Validity of the Risk Matrix 2000 in England and Wales [J].
Barnett, Georgia D. ;
Wakeling, Helen C. ;
Howard, Philip D. .
SEXUAL ABUSE-A JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2010, 22 (04) :443-470
[5]  
Beech Anthony, 2002, Sex Abuse, V14, P155, DOI 10.1177/107906320201400206
[6]   Within-treatment outcome among sexual offenders: A review [J].
Beggs, Sarah .
AGGRESSION AND VIOLENT BEHAVIOR, 2010, 15 (05) :369-379
[7]   Is There an Allegiance Effect for Assessment Instruments? Actuarial Risk Assessment as an Exemplar [J].
Blair, Pamela R. ;
Marcus, David K. ;
Boccaccini, Marcus T. .
CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY-SCIENCE AND PRACTICE, 2008, 15 (04) :346-360
[8]  
Boer D.P., 1997, MANUAL SEXUAL VIOLEN
[9]  
Craig L.A., 2008, ASSESSING RISK SEX O
[10]   Cross-validation of the risk matrix 2000 sexual and violent scales [J].
Craig, LA ;
Beech, A ;
Browne, KD .
JOURNAL OF INTERPERSONAL VIOLENCE, 2006, 21 (05) :612-633